Rubens, Muni

Abstract Background There is evidence that gastrointestinal disease (GI) outcomes are poorer among patients from underrepresented backgrounds. However, the impact of hospital patient racial diversity on GI outcomes is understudied. Aims We aimed to investigate the impact of hospital patient racial diversity on GI outcomes Methods Using the 2019 National Inpatient Sample (NIS), racial diversity was defined by the percentage of Hispanic or Indigenous American patients discharged from each hospital. GI discharge diagnoses were defined by diagnostic related group. We included GI bleeding, inflammatory bowel diseases, GI obstruction, cirrhosis, and alcoholic hepatitis. Logistic regression was used to predict major complication rates or comorbidity (MCC), long length of stay (LOS), and high total charges. Control variables included age, gender, payer type, patient location, area-associated income quartile, hospital characteristics including size, urban vs. rural, teaching vs. nonteaching, region, and the interaction of the percentage of Hispanic and Indigenous Americans with patient race. Results were validated with the 2018 NIS dataset. Results Our analysis cohort of 537,830 hospitalizations included 252,225 GI bleeding discharges, 59,310 gastrointestinal obstruction discharges, 106,820 cirrhosis and alcoholic hepatitis discharges, and 119,475 inflammatory bowel diseases discharges. In the unadjusted analyses, MCC rates were higher among Hispanic (24.8%) and Indigenous American patients (30.4%), compared to Whites (18.3%). In adjusted analyses, compared to white patients, Hispanic patients had higher MCC rates [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.21, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.15-1.28]. The same trend was seen among Indigenous American patients [OR 1.25, (95% CI) 1.09-1.43]. However, as hospital Hispanic diversity increased, inpatient MCC outcomes for Hispanics improved [OR 0.93, (95% CI) 0.87-1.14], and were even better among Indigenous American patients as hospital inpatient Indigenous American diversity increased [OR 0.83, (95% CI) 0.73-0.94] (Table 1). A similar improvement in MCC with increasing Hispanic and Indigenous American diversity was observed in the 2018 validation cohort. Table 1 highlights impact of increasing diversity on LOS and total charges. Conclusions Increasing hospital inpatient Hispanic and Indigenous American diversity is associated with better outcomes for these underrepresented minority groups. More research is needed on the impact of cultural competence and linguistic concordance on patient outcomes. Funding Agencies None

BACKGROUND: The impact of English proficiency on gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) outcomes remains unclear. In this analysis, we compare inpatient GIB outcomes between patients with English as their primary language (EPL) and those with a primary language other than English (PLOE). METHODS: Using the 2019 State Inpatient Databases for New Jersey, Maryland, and Michigan, we created an analysis cohort of GIB hospitalizations using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision codes. Patients were stratified by primary language (EPL vs PLOE) and type of bleeding (variceal upper GI bleeding [VUGIB], nonvariceal upper GI bleeding [NVUGIB], and lower GI bleeding (LGIB)]. Regression analyses were used to compare mortality, 30-day readmissions, and length of stay. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: In the cohort, 5.5%–10% of the patients spoke a primary language other than English. Endoscopy utilization was lower among patients with PLOE vs EPL for NVUGIB (17.2% vs 21.2%, P < 0.001) and LGIB (26.3% vs 29.2%, P = 0.027). Patients with PLOE had higher odds of dying of VUGIB (aOR 1.45, 95% CI 1.16–2.48) and LGIB (aOR 1.71, 95% CI 1.22–2.12). Patients with PLOE were also more likely to be readmitted after NVUGIB (aOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.64–1.81). However, after controlling for the percentage of patients with PLOE discharged from each hospital, the disparities in mortality and readmissions were no longer detected. DISCUSSION: Disparities exist in GIB outcomes among patients with PLOE, but these gaps narrow at hospitals with higher percentages of patients with PLOE. Cultural and linguistic competence may improve outcomes in this vulnerable group.

AbstractBackground and AimThe impact of the Coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic on patients with liver disease is not well described at the population level in the United States. We used the largest, nationwide inpatient dataset to describe inpatient liver disease outcomes in the United States during the first year of the pandemic (2020) using 2018 and 2019 as comparator years.MethodsUsing the National Inpatient Sample (2018–2020), we explored year‐to‐year and 2020 month‐to‐month trends in hospitalizations, length of stay, and inpatient mortality for liver‐related complications including cirrhosis, alcohol‐associated liver disease (ALD) and alcoholic hepatitis using regression modeling. We reported relative change (RC) in the study period.ResultsDecompensated cirrhosis hospitalizations decreased in 2020 compared with 2019 (RC: −2.7%, P < 0.001) while all‐cause mortality increased by 15.5% (P < 0.001). Hospitalizations for ALD increased compared with pre‐pandemic years (RC: 9.2%, P < 0.001) with a corresponding increase in mortality in 2020 (RC 25.2%, P = 0.002). We observed an increase in liver transplant surgery mortality during the peak months of the pandemic. Importantly, mortality from COVID‐19 was higher among patients with decompensated cirrhosis (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.53–1.94]), Native Americans (OR 1.76, 95% CI [1.53–2.02]), and patients from lower socioeconomic groups.ConclusionsCirrhosis hospitalizations decreased in 2020 compared with pre‐pandemic years but were associated with higher all‐cause mortality rates particularly in the peak months of the COVID‐19 pandemic. In‐hospital COVID‐19 mortality was higher among Native Americans, patients with decompensated cirrhosis, chronic illnesses, and those from lower socioeconomic groups.

Abstract Background The impact of the Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on patients with liver disease is not well described at the population level in the United States. Purpose We used the largest, nationwide inpatient dataset to describe inpatient liver disease outcomes in the United States during the first year of the pandemic (2020) using 2018 and 2019 as comparator years. Method Using the National Inpatient Sample (2018-2020), we explored year-to-year and 2020 month-to-month trends in hospitalizations, length of stay, and inpatient mortality for liver-related indications including compensated cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis, alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (VUGIB) using regression modeling. We also looked at the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on liver transplantation rates. A p-value &lt;0.05 was considered statistically significant. Result(s) Hospitalizations for both compensated and decompensated cirrhosis decreased in 2020 compared to 2019 (relative change [RC] of 1.5%, p &lt;0.001, Table 1). Interestingly, hospitalizations for ALD and AH increased in 2020 compared to pre-pandemic years (ALD RC=15.5% and AH RC 17.0%; p&lt;0.001). Despite the decrease in cirrhosis hospitalizations in 2020, all-cause inpatient mortality among patients with compensated cirrhosis increased from 30,135 in 2019 to 35,220 in 2020 (p&lt;0.001) and from 22,850 in 2019 to 26,390 in 2020 among patients with decompensated cirrhosis (p&lt;0.001). This was accompanied by a 27.8% increase in mortality for ALD (p=0.004) in comparison to pre-pandemic years. Corresponding to the peaks of the pandemic, we observed the fewest cirrhosis hospitalizations in April and December 2020 (Table 2), however, these months had the highest observed mortality rates (p-trend ≤ 0.004). Reassuringly, liver transplantation rates were not significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic (p=0.51). Image Conclusion(s) Cirrhosis hospitalizations, in general, decreased in 2020 compared to pre-pandemic years but were associated with higher all-cause mortality rates particularly in the peak months of the COVID-19 pandemic (April and December 2020) possibly reflecting COVID-19 specific mortality. Alcoholic liver disease admissions also increased during the pandemic while liver transplantation rates were not significant impacted. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below None Disclosure of Interest None Declared

OBJECTIVE A systematic review was performed to provide objective evidence on the use of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the management of secretory pituitary adenomas and develop consensus recommendations. METHODS The authors performed a systematic review of the English-language literature up until June 2018 using the PRISMA guidelines. The PubMed (Medline), Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched. A total of 45 articles reporting single-institution outcomes of SRS for acromegaly, Cushing’s disease, and prolactinomas were selected and included in the analysis. RESULTS For acromegaly, random effects meta-analysis estimates for crude tumor control rate, crude endocrine remission rate, and any new hypopituitarism rates were 97.0% (95% CI 96.0%–98.0%), 44.0% (95% CI 35.0%–53.0%), and 17.0% (95% CI 13.0%–23.0%), respectively. For Cushing’s disease, random effects estimates for crude tumor control rate, crude endocrine remission rate, and any new hypopituitarism rate were 92.0% (95% CI 87.0%–95.0%), 48.0% (95% CI 35.0%–61.0%), and 21.0% (95% CI 13.0%–31.0%), respectively. For prolactinomas, random effects estimates for crude tumor control rate, crude endocrine remission rate, and any new hypopituitarism rate were 93.0% (95% CI 90.0%–95.0%), 28.0% (95% CI 19.0%–39.0%), and 12.0% (95% CI 6.0%–24.0%), respectively. Meta-regression analysis did not show a statistically significant association between mean margin dose with crude endocrine remission rate or mean margin dose with development of any new hypopituitarism rate for any of the secretory subtypes. CONCLUSIONS SRS offers effective tumor control of hormone-producing pituitary adenomas in the majority of patients but a lower rate of endocrine improvement or remission.

Abstract Background This systematic review reports on outcomes and toxicities following stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for non-functioning pituitary adenomas (NFAs) and presents consensus opinions regarding appropriate patient management. Methods Using the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, a systematic review was performed from articles of ≥10 patients with NFAs published prior to May 2018 from the Medline database using the key words “radiosurgery” and “pituitary” and/or “adenoma.” Weighted random effects models were used to calculate pooled outcome estimates. Results Of the 678 abstracts reviewed, 35 full-text articles were included describing the outcomes of 2671 patients treated between 1971 and 2017 with either single fraction SRS or hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HSRT). All studies were retrospective (level IV evidence). SRS was used in 27 studies (median dose: 15 Gy, range: 5–35 Gy) and HSRT in 8 studies (median total dose: 21 Gy, range: 12–25 Gy, delivered in 3–5 fractions). The 5-year random effects local control estimate after SRS was 94% (95% CI: 93.0–96.0%) and 97.0% (95% CI: 93.0–98.0%) after HSRT. The 10-year local control random effects estimate after SRS was 83.0% (95% CI: 77.0–88.0%). Post-SRS hypopituitarism was the most common treatment-related toxicity observed, with a random effects estimate of 21.0% (95% CI: 15.0–27.0%), whereas visual dysfunction or other cranial nerve injuries were uncommon (range: 0–7%). Conclusions SRS is an effective and safe treatment for patients with NFAs. Encouraging short-term data support HSRT for select patients, and mature outcomes are needed before definitive recommendations can be made. Clinical practice opinions were developed on behalf of the International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS).